How will Trump affect pensions and investments ?

But be honest with yourself - you are making an active decision that you know better than the aggregate market consensus.
Yes you are correct, but its hardly an extreme position, i think the us share should be back at 50% not 70%. I can afford to be wrong a bit but the guys constructing the funds can't. They can't afford to miss out on any US growth despite the risks because they get slated if nvidia has another great year and they were not fully exposed. If it goes bad they can say we were just following the market.
 
international equity fund being heavily exposed to US tech stocks , then 71% of its stocks were US and predominately the Mag 7, they must have been reading my posts because now they are only at 66% US lol
And then the MSCI EM Index went up something like 30-40%. European indexes did well too I think. The smart money is diversifying and you hear about it all over the youtubeosphere.

Choosing to reallocate from US to international isn't timing the market, it's addressing over-concentration.
 
Choosing to reallocate from US to international isn't timing the market, it's addressing over-concentration
And unfortunately alot of standard pensions and the new myfuturefund doesn't give people much scope to reallocate from the US markets or bonds. All you get to choose are high risk, medium risk and low risk.
Last year when i was concerned at the over allocation (in my opinion) to the US i couldn't get any answers on how those proportions are chosen and when they would be changing, there is nobody on the phone at zurich who will discuss how the funds are allocated , it sll seems to be shrouded in a veil of secrecy. The guys in switzerland actually deciding the fund structure would not be available to mere pension holders like me and nobody else has a grasp of that in dublin. Its also not something you can google . There is no explanation as far as i can see as to why they reduced the US exposure from 71% back to 66%. Id love if these guys talked a bit more beyond the bland corporate jargon
 
I don't think anyone gets to enquire about these things. World/Global Equity indexes are all the same and we have to trust the stock pickers to know when to quit certain allocations. The only thing you can really do if you have a personal preference is up the level of international/emerging markets I order to reduce the overall US exposure. EMs are a good counterweight to US and the institutionals are confident they will have higher growth over the next 10 years.
 
World/Global Equity indexes are all the same and we have to trust the stock pickers to know when to quit certain allocations.
There is no stock picker in an index fund. They buy shares exactly in proportion to the market capitalisation (i.e. size in €) of each stock in that market.
 
Last edited:
There is no stock picker in an index fund. They buy shares exactly in proportion to the market capitalisation (i.e. size in €) of each stock in that market.
Yes, but don't all such passive index funds have their own proprietary "algorithm" for when and how to buy/sell? Otherwise why would there be any marginal difference in returns between, say, Vanguard and BlackRock for funds tracking the same index?
 
have their own proprietary "algorithm" for when and how to buy/sell?
They have their own methodology for how to track the index. They don't always hold all of the components of the index. That's how you get the tracking error.
 
don't think anyone gets to enquire about these things. World/Global Equity indexes are all the same and we have to trust the stock pickers to know when to quit certain allocations.
The "zurich international equity fund" i was discussing is an acrively managed fund not an index fund though i accept it generally will try and follow those global indices with high US stock exposure.

However i don't accept that pension fund pickers should be protected from discussing why they are choosing their stocks especially the very large holdings . Afterall if i choose an investment fund or an investment trust or even berkshire , those guys have to justify why they are choosing big holdings in a stock or selling out of a stock. Why are pension fund pickers protected from all that rigour, we don't as far as i know get to find out the competancy of the people that are doing it, their experience etc like you do for investment funds that are outside of pensions.

Afterall for many people they could have several hundred thousand in a particular pension fund and they don't get to find out who or why the fund is constructed. Surely that is bizare and archaic in the 21st century?
 
This implies you started an ARF but have not yet drawn it down?
Seems clear to me. Using one of their pension pots they took 25% as a tax free lump sum (and put that on deposit) and transferred the remaining 75% to an ARF from which no income will be drawn until maybe 2027.
I have a few pension pots, and because of the very well flagged uncertainty to come. i actioned an ARF on the largest of these in mid December, at a relative market high. The uncertainty was one reason, the other is i will probably commence drawdowns, from that specific ARF probably in 2027, so at least, 25 % of that fund is locked down, and was immediately reinvested in full in a 2 year 6% gross fixed rate savings account, albeit the balance, is currently affected, and has dropped circa 8%, since mid December, but i won’t be changing my strategy, will roll with it.
Would be interested to know if so and how?
What do you mean by "how"? You can buy an ARF with a pension any time after the relevant retirement age (50 in many cases) and not draw any income from it until the year in which you turn 61 at which point you'll have to take at least 4% p.a. (and 5% from the year in which you turn 71).
 
Last edited:
no income
Thanks Clubman. I only have one pot (company pension plan). Didn’t know one could take TFLS and place balance in ARF and not drawdown until later date (I understood once activated mandatory 4% to 71 or pay tax on same as though one had drawn 4%). Hence question. I’m 64.
 
I understood once activated mandatory 4% to 71 or pay tax on same as though one had drawn 4%).
Not if you're under 61.
I’m 64.
In your case you'd have to take 4% if/when you start an ARF.

What is the status of your pension? Have you already taken your tax free lump sum and/or are drawing a retirement income or is the pension still fully invested and untouched so far?
 
Are you clear on your options in terms of when and how you can access the pension when you decide to do so? If not then you should write to your pension provider and ask them to lay these out for you.
 
Back
Top